My initial thoughts are all related to development -



Coaches - what the hell do patience and discipline really do in relationship to each other? Does a prospect suffer if a coach has 0 patience but 100 discipline and a high related IQ?



Prospect development - is it related more towards IP and ABs -  or - game appearances? Or does it take both into effect?

In other words, what is better 120 games played and either 400 ABs for a batter / 35 appearances and 170 IP for a starter
-or -
130 games played and 250 ABs for a batter / 31 appearances and 180 IP for a starter



Prospect development might be the most important part of the game, and there are a lot of conflicting views on the questions above, so thats what I am interested in...

When can I put in a setting that says: ,Thou shalt not attmpt to steal second base with 2 out and a runner on 3rd'

Or 'I don't care which way he bats. Put in my leftie SuA before my rightie SuB'

Will the mash/major injury issue continue or  not? Will the random play continue or will players fall back into form in regard to metrics.

What is WIS going to do to fill my world?  

I'd like to know whether, from a programming standpoint, it would be possible/practical to contract teams to create custom sized worlds, as MikeT23 has suggested.

Is bronxcheer representing WIS at this chat or will it be another member of the staff?  this could affect my questions.  

I find that the new International Scouting fuzziness has really shaken peoples confidence in budgeting $20 million on that category.  Have the changes gone too far?  I am not sure what others think about this, and don't want to ask the question if others aren't having the same experience as users in my leagues seem to be having.  Pretty much every other signing comes with someone upset that the ratings were not even close to accurate.

Posted by alogman1 on 2/3/2016 10:47:00 AM (view original):
Is bronxcheer representing WIS at this chat or will it be another member of the staff?  this could affect my questions.  

I believe it said tzent

Posted by gotigers17 on 2/3/2016 2:03:00 PM (view original):
I find that the new International Scouting fuzziness has really shaken peoples confidence in budgeting $20 million on that category.  Have the changes gone too far?  I am not sure what others think about this, and don't want to ask the question if others aren't having the same experience as users in my leagues seem to be having.  Pretty much every other signing comes with someone upset that the ratings were not even close to accurate.

I don't think the changes have gone too far.  I think some additional fuzziness in the system was warranted.  Prospect ratings were too predictable and easy to figure out for experienced owners.   Ratings not being as accurate at the same scouting levels shouldn't be a surprise, that was the update.  

Well if I am trying to sign IFA's I normally will have the scouting to $20 million but from what I have heard even having it at $14 million makes it a total crap shoot with guys showing up at an 83 OVR and then after signing having a current of 45 with scouting of 71 OVR.  Even with my $20 million budget I have had a couple of big misses.

So when I say have the changes gone to far what I guess I am really getting at is did it go from being too predictable into now being largely a luck of the draw.  I actually haven't really noticed the same with the draft.  Most of the time the good players I see at $20 million scouting end up as actually good players.  My experience in say 7 seasons since the update are SSS to the extreme, but it does seem to be more fuzzy at $20 million in IFA than it does in the draft.  

Are others seeing the same?  Why would that be the case? 

Posted by gotigers17 on 2/3/2016 9:40:00 PM (view original):
Well if I am trying to sign IFA's I normally will have the scouting to $20 million but from what I have heard even having it at $14 million makes it a total crap shoot with guys showing up at an 83 OVR and then after signing having a current of 45 with scouting of 71 OVR.  Even with my $20 million budget I have had a couple of big misses.

So when I say have the changes gone to far what I guess I am really getting at is did it go from being too predictable into now being largely a luck of the draw.  I actually haven't really noticed the same with the draft.  Most of the time the good players I see at $20 million scouting end up as actually good players.  My experience in say 7 seasons since the update are SSS to the extreme, but it does seem to be more fuzzy at $20 million in IFA than it does in the draft.  

Are others seeing the same?  Why would that be the case? 

I have experienced the **** show that is IFA aquisitions with a $14 million IFA budget. That said, thats how it is in the real world. I just adjust. I won't plow money into IFA until my team or teams hit that $18 million + range.

I'm fine with the "new scouting."  An owner used to be able to get decent returns on half-assed budgeting, a little from column A, a little from column B, never any real harm done.  The "new" system seems to ask owners to pick a strategy and commit money toward it, and if the end goal was to redistribute players in a less predictable fashion, then I think it's been achieved.

Change the thinking. Stop getting angry that $16 million for IFA scouting won't get you precise scouting, instead, spend 1-5 million on IFA scouting and buy 15 $1 million dollar 'lottery tickets'. When 2-3 of those guys hit, you'll feel better about yourself. Remember, everyone is seeing these 'fuzzy ratings' not just you. 

I don't think it is a total crap shoot at 14.   I've gotten good info at 12 (granted, still with some misses).  I actually have had more misses with the draft than IFA under the new system.  If you're not happy with what you're getting, bump it up.  The days of knowing you're getting a good player with minimal scouting budgets are over, however, as they should be.  

As a new player of HBD I find having to start with a "reset" budget 105m payroll and scouting at 10m and being restricted to the 4m increase is a huge disadvantage especially if you are taking on terrible team.  Having 14m in any scouting and not understanding just how "fuzzy" the numbers you are looking at isn't helping a bad team get better.  I have seen IFA numbers being inflated/deflated as much as 25-30% from the 14m IFA scouting I had and the 20m scouting another member of my world had.

It is my understanding that many worlds don't want teams "tanking" but at the same time there is so much going on for a new player that it can be a tad overwhelming.  When you are really trying to make a solid pick and you are stuck with 14m scouting you are potentially gambling on the ratings numbers you are seeing stemming from these initial budgeting restrictions.  That gives a distinct advantage over other teams with top picks that have had the opportunity to max out their scouting.